4.3 Article

Expanding the Cenozoic paleoceanographic record in the Central Arctic Ocean: IODP Expedition 302 Synthesis

期刊

CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GEOSCIENCES
卷 1, 期 2, 页码 157-175

出版社

DE GRUYTER POLAND SP Z O O
DOI: 10.2478/v10085-009-0015-6

关键词

ocean drilling; Lomonosov Ridge; Cenozoic paleoceanography; Arctic tectonics

资金

  1. European Consortium for Ocean Research Drilling
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan
  3. Ministry of Science and Technology, People's Republic of China
  4. National Science Foundation, United States
  5. Swedish Research Council
  6. National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Arctic Coring Expedition (ACEX) proved to be one of the most transformational missions in almost 40 year of scientific ocean drilling. ACEX recovered the first Cenozoic sedimentary sequence from the Arctic Ocean and extended earlier piston core records from similar to 1.5 Ma back to similar to 56 Ma. The results have had a major impact in paleoceanography even though the recovered sediments represents only 29% of Cenozoic time. The missing time intervals were primarily the result of two unexpected hiatuses. This important Cenozoic paleoceanographic record was reconstructed from a total of 339 m sediments. The wide range of analyses conducted on the recovered material, along with studies that integrated regional tectonics and geophysical data, produced surprising results including high Arctic Ocean surface water temperatures and a hydrologically active climate during the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), the occurrence of a fresher water Arctic in the Eocene, ice-rafted debris as old as middle Eocene, a middle Eocene environment rife with organic carbon, and ventilation of the Arctic Ocean to the North Atlantic through the Fram Strait near the early-middle Miocene boundary. Taken together, these results have transformed our view of the Cenozoic Arctic Ocean and its role in the Earth climate system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据